When former Gov. Larry Hogan canceled Baltimore’s east-west Red Line in 2015, it revealed a fatal fault in the city’s public transit system: One person held nearly all the power.

It didn’t matter that Baltimore’s mayor and City Council supported the light rail expansion. That Maryland’s congressional representatives had secured federal money for it, or even that the state had already spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on it.

The Maryland Transit Administration, a state-level agency running a regional system, had to do what the boss said.

Now, more than a decade later, state lawmakers seem poised to shift the power dynamic.

A proposal in Annapolis would create an MTA oversight board, a shake-up for the state transportation department that could impact how budget decisions get made and lay the groundwork for even larger changes in the future. The House Environment and Transportation Committee will hear and discuss the bill Thursday.

It’s about “choosing our own destiny in the Baltimore region,” said Del. Mark Edelson, a Democrat co-sponsoring the bill.

“When you don’t have a seat at the table, the amount of money you’re going to get is less. And there are very important projects and programs that need to happen for the Baltimore region that historically have not been prioritized and funded at high enough levels,” he said.

Frustrations over Baltimore’s transit system are nothing new. But they’re creating more waves in Annapolis as transit advocates, Baltimore public school students, and an emboldened city delegation pack budget hearings and hold rallies.

On Monday, Senate President Bill Ferguson even requested a hold on confirming acting Transportation Secretary Kathryn “Katie” Thomson to her role, citing concerns over funding levels and progress on certain projects.

What it would do

The proposed law would create a board of nine people to oversee Baltimore’s bus, rail and paratransit services. It would review and approve the MTA’s budget and greenlight major capital projects.

Maryland’s governor would appoint five members representing regular riders of the system, people with disabilities, area anchor institutions and labor unions. With the majority of the appointments, the governor still would wield significant power, but certain board functions would require a sixth vote for approval.

Of the four remaining seats, Baltimore’s mayor would appoint two, and the county executives for Baltimore and Anne Arundel counties would appoint the others. The proposal also would create a separate board charged with oversight of the MARC train and commuter bus program.

The MTA supports the idea. During a budget hearing Monday, Administrator Holly Arnold said the law also would speed up projects by exempting major ones from certain onerous state procurement provisions and better protect the agency from lawsuits.

“We’re committed to making sure we’re working closely with the boards and the General Assembly to make this work,” Arnold said.

On Wednesday, Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott voiced his support in an op-ed in the Baltimore Sun, saying it would create a framework that “balances state control with meaningful local accountability and transparency.”

Some local advocates support the idea, too.

Despite a budget that gets bigger every year, the state transportation department hasn’t expanded Baltimore’s transit network in decades, said Brian O’Malley, director and CEO of the Central Maryland Transportation Alliance, a policy research and advocacy organization. Students and workers who rely on the system get a message that they aren’t a priority.

“MTA can put out all the plans it wants, whether it’s to build a new rail line or to expand and improve the bus system, but none of that will happen unless the governor supports and funds it,” O’Malley said.

What it wouldn’t do

A seat at the table is just half of the puzzle; the other half is money.

Many transit and transportation agencies around the country operate as “authorities” with the power to levy local taxes or other revenue generators that they use to fund major projects. In Massachusetts, for example, Boston’s extensive rail and bus network funds a substantial amount of its work through a portion of a local sales tax, and a board of directors helps decide how it all gets spent.

The MTA gets its money from the state’s transportation trust fund — the same pot of money that gets doled out to the State Highway Administration and other transportation initiatives.

The proposal in Annapolis doesn’t touch the money question — unsurprising in an election year when no one seems interested in floating anything that could be perceived as a tax increase. But Edelson said the proposal is a step in that direction, and that creating a regional transit authority is the ”future that is staring us in the face.”

Issues with long-term transportation funding in Maryland run deeper than just figuring out how to expand Baltimore’s transit network. And putting some financial skin in the game might pose a daunting challenge for a city facing myriad overdue infrastructure needs after decades of a shrinking tax base.

But “in order to have a say in our own destiny,” Edelson said, “we need to be putting money into the pot to build what we want to build.”